New, looking at Camano 31vs Nordic Tug 32

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Best wishes! You were looking at two great options! I bought a Camano a year ago, and am very happy. I use the flybridge far more than I anticipated, best seat for enjoying our wonderful NC and other waterways. V-berth is huge, visibility from cabin steering station is great. Following sea over 3’ is handled best with manual steering. Fabulous delivery cruise from Bristol RI to Chocowinity, Cypress Landing NC. Yacht club friends with Nordic 32’ are also happy with their choices. Enjoy! Come cruise NC’s extensive Sounds and Rivers, truly Small Trawler Heaven!
 
djones44 said:
The Nordic Tugs have great interiors, but no bridge and in the PNW I would look for a boat with a covered after deck. You just get so much more usable space and storage in all weather.
Click to expand...

A Stamoid cover over the aft deck is quite common.
 
When I was shopping for a boat for PNW-Inside Passage use I wanted a fly bridge. I got a fly bridge. I enjoyed my times up there but they were infrequent.

If I was shopping again a fly bridge would be nice but I would consider a quality boat without one.


Here is a link to a blog which might provide a little insight to how well a 32 NT can do in the PNW. Airship is a 32' NT and Safe Harbour is a 37' NT


Blog – Airship – Slowboat
 
I am curious how you deal with the foredeck access issue on a design like the Camano. I was quite interested in the Nordhavn Coast Pilot, but rejected it on that basis - and it at least has walkable side decks. It looks to me like on the Camano to reach the foredeck one must exit the back, climb up on the rail, shinny along the foot ledge? Or go up through the stateroom hatch? Wondering how the owners do it in practice.
 
sunchaser said:
A Stamoid cover over the aft deck is quite common.
Click to expand...



It is common, OTOH there are boat designs that have a covered aft cockpit from the factory. The trick is finding one that is as affordable.
 
The Nordy also has a price tag of close to $2 mill
 
Nordhavn Coast Pilot? These are around $250K - $300K. They only made 24 of them or so. No pilothouse doors so you have to go out the back and up the side for foredeck access or to tend breast lines.
 
The new Nordhavn Coastal Pilot 59 would probably be in the $2 million range.

The earlier Coastal Pilot 35 would be significantly less and has been out of production for some time. It wasn't one of Nordhavn's more successful models.
 
Camano side decks

Great point make about skinny side decks on the Camano and other boats with skinny side decks. For people of average height, holding the stainless rail and side stepping the side deck is fairly easy, but obviously not ideal Here is a process that my admiral and I find useful: Backing into a slip, the admiral is in the cockpit with a stern line in hand, and the same side bow line run from the port or starboard cleat, outside and back to the same side aft cleat. She deftly tosses the stern line to the dock hand, then uncleats the bow line, and tosses that to the same dock hand. So, the dock hand has both dockside bow and stern lines, while I hold the bow to the dock with the bow thruster. Depending how nimble the dock hand is, tossing the lines is usually a two step matter, perhaps 30 seconds apart. When no dock hand is present, the admiral loops a cleat with the stern line, secures it, and then de-cleats the bow line and steps onto the dock while I hold the bow with the bow thruster. Surely readers on this sight have an even better way of not asking the admiral to walk the narrow side deck, but this works method works well for us. Sometimes we'll leave bow lines rigged for this, and other times, the bow lines are not rigged and as we approach the dock, the admiral takes the helm and I rig the bow line on the dock side by using the narrow side deck. Haven't tried the v-berth hatch for that purpose, yet.

I welcome better ideas from readers for docking while avoiding the admiral's using the narrow side decks. By the way, she doesn't balk at using the side decks, but I try to be just a little bit chivalrous in not asking. I appreciate comments from readers!

NCheaven
 
Conrad said:
The new Nordhavn Coastal Pilot 59 would probably be in the $2 million range.

The earlier Coastal Pilot 35 would be significantly less and has been out of production for some time. It wasn't one of Nordhavn's more successful models.
Click to expand...

A 59' boat is a little more boat than the subject of discussion here (Camano 31 or NT32). Yeah, it'd cost a little more too. It's proponents claim that the N35 was successful, but it cost nearly as much to make as a larger model, the price climbed out of the market window during the 4 year production run. It's a good looking boat with a lot of nice features. But no pilothouse doors. Decent side decks. I might have owned one but for the doors and inadequate seating for the 1st mate in the pilothouse. Hard to satisfy everyone!

My AT34 has narrow side decks and a handrail, it's not that hard to move along with two hands, but carrying a line or a fender slows you down a good deal. It does have pilothouse doors on both sides so access to the bow or breast lines is easy. I suppose you adapt to what you have - but I still like the doors.
 
Ncheaven,

We keep the bow line tight around the outside of the stantions and cleated at the midship cleat, while underway.

When docking we back in bringing the stern close in to dock.

Crew member steps onto dock off the swim grid and cleats the stern line and helmsman brings the bow to the dock with the thruster if required.

Crew member then walks the dock to the midship cleat, retrieves the bow line and cleats off the bow.

Engine shut down once bow and stern are secure and we can then fine tune the lines as we see fit.

No need for the crew to be on the rail at all during docking. Even easier if you have help on the dock, obviously.

As far as narrow rails go, we tend to knock back to slow while anyone is on the rail while underway and insist that no one is out there without someone keeping an eye. We also insist that life vests are worn by any one on the rail.

If the weather is inclement there is normally no need for anyone on the foredeck unless assisting in dropping the hook.
 
Thank you!

Thank you, NorWyn. Very similar, but you stated the process more clearly than I did. I presumed a non-floating dock - my favorite destinations don't have floating docks, but the swim platform is certainly best for my home dock - floating. Yes, I require life vests at all times - most likely bad scenario is bumping the head unconscious while falling off the boat, disappearing to the dark tannin stained waters common in NC/VA/SC. So, we wear automatically inflating vests as soon as we climb on board, and while we are preparing to depart, etc. Nice to have you also affirm that. If I read your info correctly, you live in one of the most beautiful parts of the world! What a great place to cruise your Camano!

NCheaven
 
Ncheaven...

And so we learn.... had not considered no floating docks which we don’t see a lot of here - at least so far...

I have not had the pleasure of seeing NC but if it is anything like SC your part of the world is pretty special as well!

If you ever have occasion to be out this way, drop a line and we will take you out for a cruise.


All the best.
 
Life cycle cost

DDW said:
The NT may be cheaper, if you look at life cycle cost.
Click to expand...

Great point,; would you drill down a bit, so that I might understand the criteria one might use to arrive at a decision fairly easily!

Btw, I have dogs as well and the Ranger is too cramped for all of us. I would consider it an excellent single handed boat if I went that route.
 
Updating my thread, if you've been following you know Jason (South of Heaven) has listed his Camano 31. Having never actually ridden in one, I was interested in talking to him because my wife and I were on our way from Seattle to Boston for a week. He ended up letting me fill one of his diesel tanks, and I got to see how a very nice Camano runs. Honestly I'm torn between love for the Camano layout with the crusing speed, so I am still in information gathering mode, but for anyone looking for a Camano, you have to give this one a look. Thank you again Jason!
 
No problem at all Perry. Nice to meet you folks!
 
Thought I would follow up on a thread I started a year ago.

Funny how time and experiences change things. After experiencing Jason's Camano 31 in Boston I concluded that it was just too slow; part our goals while still working are to trek over to Victoria from Bellingham on a weekend; we don't have the time to go at 8 kts. Plus, a 100K boat that we can only use for a couple of vacation weeks per year plus weekends didn't make a lot of sense to us.

After giving it a rest through November last year we started looking again. Long story but we ended up purchasing a 30' Tollycraft Sport.

We love the boat, and for us and the investment to get going it is working well. I have no reservations about the purchase........ however, one weekend running around in the gulf islands and back home yielded a fill up that exceeded $600. THAT was an eye opener. So what are we doing? Same thing as most of the rest of the Tolly cruisers do........... they run at 8 kts, to conserve fuel.

Thought you all would get a kick out of my realization, given the name of the forum and all.

When we aren't planning our next cruise, we look at our next boat, for retirement. We want one queen bed, minimal teak, a real efficient diesel that can get 3 mpg on a decent day, a covered cockpit with the purpose of cruising the San Juans, but capable of points north to Alaska. Old DeFevers Eagles, Kadey Krogen often pop up on my searches.

Thanks!
 
Slow Ride

Fuel economy was a big part of our decision when we purchased our Nordic Tug. Although we had no real GPH or MPG information on the overpowered 32 we were confident it would be 3.5 mpg or better. To our surprise we did a lot better on the trip from Connecticut to Florida. We kept the speed down to hull speed or a little less and we burned less than 350 gallons on the whole trip of 1800+ miles(I haven't figured the miles out exactly). We were very happy. :dance:



P.S. New River Marina, Snead Ferry N.C. had the best Diesel fuel price we saw at $2.35 a gallon.
 
Ron,
The N32 has a rockered bottom does it not?
That should get you better economy numbers as you slow down.
Most FD boats and skippers run one full knot below hull speed. That should be your most economical practical cruise speed. And as you speed up you’ll pay a lower penalty than skippers w straight runs aft. Take away the keel and many so called SD boats are really planing hulls w too much weight and a big keel.
If you haven’t guessed the NT 32 is my favorite boat. But I wish it had a little more rocker ... and less power.
 
Nomad Willy said:
Ron,
The N32 has a rockered bottom does it not?
That should get you better economy numbers as you slow down.
Most FD boats and skippers run one full knot below hull speed. That should be your most economical practical cruise speed. And as you speed up you’ll pay a lower penalty than skippers w straight runs aft. Take away the keel and many so called SD boats are really planing hulls w too much weight and a big keel.
If you haven’t guessed the NT 32 is my favorite boat. But I wish it had a little more rocker ... and less power.
Click to expand...

Eric- I know you have posted your average MPG and I want to say your over the ground average is a bit over 6 knots. Am i close? We have had various discussions, you and I, on the matter. I do know that with my over prop I am running near 1500 RPM for a range of 5.9kt and 6.3 kt for an average of 6kt.
Now when the rush is on or required, I jack it up to 1650 and will see 7kt but you know, I really enjoy the sedate lower setting while traveling solo where the trip is as much a part as the arrival. Hard to explain that to visitors.:whistling:
 
Al said:
Eric- I know you have posted your average MPG and I want to say your over the ground average is a bit over 6 knots. Am i close? We have had various discussions, you and I, on the matter. I do know that with my over prop I am running near 1500 RPM for a range of 5.9kt and 6.3 kt for an average of 6kt.
Now when the rush is on or required, I jack it up to 1650 and will see 7kt but you know, I really enjoy the sedate lower setting while traveling solo where the trip is as much a part as the arrival. Hard to explain that to visitors.:whistling:
Click to expand...

Al, at 6 knots what sort of fuel burn do you experience?
 
Al,
It is interesting how you and many others “Like” or even enjoy having an engine overloaded and running running less or much less rpm.

I’m just the opposite in that I love to hear and feel an engine running “free” and lightly loaded. Like a truck going up a grade making a lot of noise but comfortably loaded. Depending on the gears there comes a time while downshifting that you can only maintain a speed with heavy throttle or as overloaded. Perhaps you can’t maintain and need to shift back down. But if you can maintain w about 80% throttle some will climb the rest of the grade in that mode. There will most likely be less noise but the sound will be of an overloaded engine. If one were to downshift and realize a load of say 65% or less there will be an easy note that will be comfortable to listen to for long periods. Some will climb the grade with the struggling overloaded engine making less “racket” but obviously working hard. I much prefer having the engine “singing” at a little higher rpm and less load. It’s a hard thing to express. I had a Nissan Maxima w a 6cyl diesel and a 5 speed stick shift. That engine was so noisy I sold the car. But I used to love to come to a hill or grade w that car as it suddenly made much less noise. It got relatively quiet. So Al I know what you’re talking about but it’s hard to express the difference of the sound ... the quiet engine lugging or the underloaded engine singing but making a lot of noise.

Ideally w our diesel boats IMO we should run them a bit underloaded but w enough load to bring the critical engine parts to a temperature whereas those parts will heat the lube oil warm enough to insure sludge won’t be forming and deposits like varnish won’t be plugging our ring grooves that will eventually cause the rings to stick. Then blow-by, lack of compression, incomplete combustion and other undesirable side effects will not take place.

There are many variables of course like the modern additive packages for oil and computer controlled injection. The same things still apply. Just in different scenarios of engine speed and loads and temps.

So a low load could be fine on a newer engine but not so good on a 1970’s engine. But I’m sure there’s a good engine speed/load range for all engines and I’m also sure it’s basically found at higher rather than lower engine speeds.

The above is just my opinion and I’m not an engineer.

I should add that w a big enough engine (that many have) an engine can be ideally loaded for fuel economy and the unit could be over-propped in the popular context. But there will be a range of engine speeds at the top whereas the engine will be dangerously over-loaded .. if you go there. But at what rpm this overloaded state starts is fuzzy at best. All engine manufacturers recommend propping to WOT at rated rpm.
 
Last edited:
Nomad Willy said:
Al,
It is interesting how you and many others “Like” or even enjoy having an engine overloaded and running running less or much less rpm.

I’m just the opposite in that I love to hear and feel an engine running “free” and lightly loaded. Like a truck going up a grade making a lot of noise but comfortably loaded. Depending on the gears there comes a time while downshifting that you can only maintain a speed with heavy throttle or as overloaded. Perhaps you can’t maintain and need to shift back down. But if you can maintain w about 80% throttle some will climb the rest of the grade in that mode. There will most likely be less noise but the sound will be of an overloaded engine. If one were to downshift and realize a load of say 65% or less there will be an easy note that will be comfortable to listen to for long periods. Some will climb the grade with the struggling overloaded engine making less “racket” but obviously working hard. I much prefer having the engine “singing” at a little higher rpm and less load. It’s a hard thing to express. I had a Nissan Maxima w a 6cyl diesel and a 5 speed stick shift. That engine was so noisy I sold the car. But I used to love to come to a hill or grade w that car as it suddenly made much less noise. It got relatively quiet. So Al I know what you’re talking about but it’s hard to express the difference of the sound ... the quiet engine lugging or the underloaded engine singing but making a lot of noise.

Ideally w our diesel boats IMO we should run them a bit underloaded but w enough load to bring the critical engine parts to a temperature whereas those parts will heat the lube oil warm enough to insure sludge won’t be forming and deposits like varnish won’t be plugging our ring grooves that will eventually cause the rings to stick. Then blow-by, lack of compression, incomplete combustion and other undesirable side effects will not take place.

There are many variables of course like the modern additive packages for oil and computer controlled injection. The same things still apply. Just in different scenarios of engine speed and loads and temps.

So a low load could be fine on a newer engine but not so good on a 1970’s engine. But I’m sure there’s a good engine speed/load range for all engines and I’m also sure it’s basically found at higher rather than lower engine speeds.

The above is just my opinion and I’m not an engineer.

I should add that w a big enough engine (that many have) an engine can be ideally loaded for fuel economy and the unit could be over-propped in the popular context. But there will be a range of engine speeds at the top whereas the engine will be dangerously over-loaded .. if you go there. But at what rpm this overloaded state starts is fuzzy at best. All engine manufacturers recommend propping to WOT at rated rpm.
Click to expand...

Is it true that newer common rail diesels run at wider load ranges at high efficiency? I know you can't turn a Tolly into a displacement boat but I see a few people who are REALLY happy with their diesel repower.....
 
Al wrote;
“Eric- I know you have posted your average MPG and I want to say your over the ground average is a bit over 6 knots. Am i close?”

Almost dead nuts re the speed but I’ve never posted NMPG. I only think in terms of gph. And I quit posting gph as so many post wild gph numbers or even unbelievable numbers are posted on TF. For gph consumption can only have value if it’s arrived at via the same method and honestly. So you’ll just have to guess at my consumption Al.


And mpstan yes IMO.
 
Last edited:
Nomad Willy said:
Ron,
The N32 has a rockered bottom does it not?
That should get you better economy numbers as you slow down.
Most FD boats and skippers run one full knot below hull speed. That should be your most economical practical cruise speed. And as you speed up you’ll pay a lower penalty than skippers w straight runs aft. Take away the keel and many so called SD boats are really planing hulls w too much weight and a big keel.
If you haven’t guessed the NT 32 is my favorite boat. But I wish it had a little more rocker ... and less power.
Click to expand...

I’ve been asked on TF PM what “rocker” is.
My bad. I thought about explaining it but got lazy and passed. Sorry
Rocker is (if present) avery important element of boat design or hull-form shape.

If a hull bottom is straight fore and aft or (frontwards to backwards) we say it has a straight run. This is basically a universal feature of planing hulls. But it can be a feature of SD trawlers .. oddly enough. However many FD hulls have a curved bottom whereas the hull bottom is lowest roughly in the center and higher at the ends. For FD hulls there must be a curve on the bottom .. or on the sides, or both to provide a graceful way for water to flow from fwd to aft with minimal energy involved. That’s why FD hulls make so little wake. Lots of ships (the Titanic for example) has (basically) no rocker but the hull is curved on the sides. A quarter beam line however, would show what basically is rocker

The word refers to or is a comparative expression re the rockers of a rocking chair ... the curved rail that is the “legs” of a rocking chair. Rocker in a hull bottom means the bottom is curved up at the hull ends. A flat bottomed rowboat always has rocker. This element of shape is what makes it FD. And any rowboat that is any good will have enough rocker that the bottom is very slightly out of the water at both ends. So as the boat passes the water is pushed down and then is allowed to easily return to it’s vertical position .. the surface.

Rocker is most prominent in hard chined boats and is still present but becomes becomes a bit obscure in soft chined hulls. Most always it is still evident at the keel.

Anyway a boat w lots of rocker will be most easily driven and slowest of boats. A drift boat for river fishing has extreme rocker. Speed is not necessary as the river current provides that and maneuverability is obviously beneficial.

So in FD mode a hull is slower but requires less power w greater rocker. With a faster boat (SD to planing) rocker makes it slower and with more resistance. Rocker in the hull of a trawler makes it slower and more efficient.
With enough rocker in a NT32 it would become a FD boat when the rocker made the bottom rise to the surface or above like many hard chined sailboats. So basically I was saying I’d like to see a NT32 that would be much more like a FD boat and be perfectly powered w a 65 to 80hp engine. Or a 50 to 60hp engine with more .... rocker.
 
Last edited:
mpstan wrote;
“Is it true that newer common rail diesels run at wider load ranges at high efficiency? I know you can't turn a Tolly into a displacement boat but I see a few people who are REALLY happy with their diesel repower.”

Repowering a planing hull w a diesel will make the engine more efficient but not the hull. Actually the hull will be a bit less efficient because it will weigh more.

However older light plywood boats can be as efficient as a FD trawler at trawler speeds just because they are so much lighter.

So re this thread the Camano 31 will be faster and lighter and the NT32 will be more of a trawler being slower and heavier. The Camano 32 has a straight run aft making them more like a planing hull. They do go 20 knots.
 
Last edited:
Nomad Willy said:
I’ve been asked on TF PM what “rocker” is.
My bad. I thought about explaining it but got lazy and passed. Sorry
Rocker is (if present) avery important element of boat design or hull-form shape.

If a hull bottom is straight fore and aft or (frontwards to backwards) we say it has a straight run. This is basically a universal feature of planing hulls. But it can be a feature of SD trawlers .. oddly enough. However many FD hulls have a curved bottom whereas the hull bottom is lowest roughly in the center and higher at the ends. For FD hulls there must be a curve on the bottom .. or on the sides, or both to provide a graceful way for water to flow from fwd to aft with minimal energy involved. That’s why FD hulls make so little wake. Lots of ships (the Titanic for example) has (basically) no rocker but the hull is curved on the sides. A quarter beam line however, would show what basically is rocker

The word refers to or is a comparative expression re the rockers of a rocking chair ... the curved rail that is the “legs” of a rocking chair. Rocker in a hull bottom means the bottom is curved up at the hull ends. A flat bottomed rowboat always has rocker. This element of shape is what makes it FD. And any rowboat that is any good will have enough rocker that the bottom is very slightly out of the water at both ends. So as the boat passes the water is pushed down and then is allowed to easily return to it’s vertical position .. the surface.

Rocker is most prominent in hard chined boats and is still present but becomes becomes a bit obscure in soft chined hulls. Most always it is still evident at the keel.

Anyway a boat w lots of rocker will be most easily driven and slowest of boats. A drift boat for river fishing has extreme rocker. Speed is not necessary as the river current provides that and maneuverability is obviously beneficial.

So in FD mode a hull is slower but requires less power w greater rocker. With a faster boat (SD to planing) rocker makes it slower and with more resistance. Rocker in the hull of a trawler makes it slower and more efficient.
With enough rocker in a NT32 it would become a FD boat when the rocker made the bottom rise to the surface or above like many hard chined sailboats. So basically I was saying I’d like to see a NT32 that would be much more like a FD boat and be perfectly powered w a 65 to 80hp engine. Or a 50 to 60hp engine with more .... rocker.
Click to expand...

This is a good description.

You can see by the avatar on the left that our boat has considerable rocker (big "belly"). She has virtually slab sides and very hard chines. From the videos below, you can see (at 6.5kn+) there is virtually no wake whatsoever out any distance from the boat.



EDIT: Oh, by the way, we have two 54hp Yanni's pushing her along (50,000lbs). 65-70% of WOT is about 6.5kn.
 
Last edited:
Yes and almost no washingmachine turbulence behind the tramsom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Wanted Nordic Tug 32 PNW
Replies
5
Views
1K
Rickg
R
M
Mike Stern - 32 Nordic Tug
Replies
3
Views
1K
tpbrady
tpbrady
P
Dropped My Sails
Replies
5
Views
761
RT Firefly
RT Firefly
S
  • Locked
Looking for a semi-displacement in PNW or Alaska
Replies
0
Views
501
SkookumAlaska
S
M
New-ish Jefferson Rivanna owners cruising full time
Replies
5
Views
1K
MVdisconnect
M

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom